686+ or 620?

[Mxyzpltk]

Hi, and sorry for asking yet another 686+ vs 620 question. I'm in the process of getting a new revolver, to put my loved CZ75b to rest, is not that I don't like the CZ anymore, I just want to change a bit, see if I feel better with .357 than .40, and so on, anyway, lets get to the point.

I checked both guns at the shop, 4" also for the 686, and think I like the 620 better, I have not being able to shoot any of them yet, but I would like to ask, is there anything really wrong with the 620 over the 686, I know about the half lug and the two part barrel, wich I don't mind, unless there's something really wrong about it that I have not read yet.

My worries about the 620 come from the little mention the gun gets, like if it was a fluke that nobody wants to remember, is it because of the less traditional built, like what happens to all s&w that have a lock that get bashed just for that, or is there something really wrong with the 620, I've seen some positive articles and reviews about the 620, but in some places is like the 620 did not exist. This leads me to my second question, in the search for the right IWB leather for both guns, I see that most leathersmiths list the 686 but not the 620, some even list 586 but no 620, I saw that both guns are very similar and both L frames, with the exemption of the half lug, could I asume that a 686 custom made holster will fit just as nice a 620?

Yes, I plan to carry a 4" 7 shot revolver IWB in a daily basis, and have been looking for leather, so my third and last question is if you guys can recomend a temp holster that delivers fast that I could use while the wait time for a milt sparks o similar is over?

Thank you all in advance.

 

[Majic]

The 686 is just an older gun. It came out over 20 years before the 620 and it cousins. The guns are so similar that there isn't much to say about the 620 that hasn't been said in all those years about the 686.

 

[flashman70]

Yeah, the two part barrel gets criticism from the traditonalists.

 

[Hawk]

Usually when I see "you might be a gun nut if ... " threads, I chime in with something along the lines of:

"You might be a gun nut if you understand Smith and Wesson model numbers."

Didn't even know there was such a thing as a 620 until I saw this. Anyhow, I go off to S&W's web site to learn that the 620 is the new version of the 66.

Next is Wikipedia which advises me that the 66 was a "K" frame while the 686 is an "L" frame. Isn't there some microscopic difference in frame size between "K" and "L" or has that distinction faded with the introduction of 619 / 620?

I've got a 66 with me and a 686 at home and I'm uncertain I could tell a difference apart from the full length under-whatsis on the latter.

Was there a difference that existed between a six chamber 66 and 686 that no longer exists between a 7 chamber 620 and 686 (apart from the underlug)? Or are the frames still different?

If the OP is curious about the same things, cool - otherwise my apologies for the thread veer.

 

[18DAI]

If wanting a revolver to be simple, and reliable, makes one a "traditionalist", then I am a traditionalist.

I would choose a nice pre lock 686. One piece barrel, no lock to worry about, just a nice revolver. If you can't find a pre lock 686+, just buy any pre lock 686, and S&W will fit a 7-shot cylinder for you.

I would not use a key lock equipped gun as a carry gun. For range use it would not matter. Those key locks are just one more place for Mr. Murphy to lurk. If you want a second opinion, they are ugly too. YMMV. Good luck. TJ

 

[Mxyzpltk]

I see, good news then, I do like the 620 better than a regular 686, for my intended use that is, maybe later in time I could get a 6" or so 686 just for range fun, for home I already have 8 shots of 00 buck.

So I can safely asume a 686 holster will fit a 620 with no problems? I'll let the leathersmith of my choosing know that is a 620 just to be sure, but how about for a temp holster that will last me the 6 or more months of wait time? or should I just get a safepacker from wilderness?

 

[Mxyzpltk]

Hawk, it's ok, I don't mind at all, I can tell you what I know about those differences, 686 and 620 share the same L frame, cylinder (686+) and other pieces, what differences them is that the 620 comes only in 4" barrel and 7 shots, while the 686 comes in all the variations you already know. The other major difference and probably the most important is that the 620 uses a two piece barrel or actually a one piece barrel that sits inside "another" barrel that's part of the frame, if I understand correctly late model 66s had this two piece barrel also. Marketing claims that the two piece is more accurate, and last longer, but I'm not sure about that, what I'm sure of is that either 686 or 620 barrels are more accurate than what I can shoot right now, and that both will last longer than me. The L frame is just a reinforced K developed to take a constant diet of hot magnums, because there was some claims that K frames broke when fed to many hot rounds, they share the same grip, and are very similar in size. I never knew how much truth was in that claim, nor how many are too many hot rounds for a K frame, but that's another story and another thread.

I understand the worry and dislike about the lock, Thad, but I'm not a traditionalist, my other handgun is cz, wich I carry every day, and my shotgun a benelli m1, so if I could live with a intertia driven semiauto shooty and a iron curtain pistol (both superb weapons), I could let the gun lock pass, but over personal reasons there is the safety factor and that the gun functions whenever needed, and for those I have read no evidence at all that the safety failed on a medium or large frame smith, so I don't mind the lock in that side of things either. I appreciate your advice tho, and if I see a used 686 in a shelf I will check and see if the lock is there or not, but I'm not going to hold on the buy looking for one.

Right now all I care about is a way to comfortably carry one of the two heavy guns IWB, I already invested in a gun belt, all I need is a good custom leather holster and something to carry it while I wait for the first.

Thanks again for all your comments.

 

[Hawk]

Thanks - that helps.
S&W has the "K" and "L" sharing the same "medium" designation but it hadn't occured to me they had actually turned into the same frame. If so, I'd guess they'd share holsters apart from the underlug.

I've got a couple of Sparks but none for revolvers yet - worth the wait, IMHO.

Is the two-piece barrel like a fixed version of a Dan Wesson? Those had a reputation for being very accurate, IIRC.

I can't help with a temp holster. I use Comp-Tac for a "waiting on Sparks" holster. Last I talked to them, there may be a "K" frame coming soon but an "L" is months off.

 

[Mxyzpltk]

Yes, similar to Dan Wesson's, from what I read around the internet some like it, some bash it and some don't care.

Too bad comp-tac has nothing for the 686 iwb, I'll keep looking for something like galco, bianchi or similar, maybe someone else know what other brands to look for.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

My first .357 Magnum was a M619. (the fixed sight version of the M620) I like this revolver a lot, it's accurate and I like the fact it holds 7 rounds. I recently bought a 4" M686 for PPC matches. I needed a 6 round revolver for PPC. I sold the M619 because it would get little if any range time since I will be using the 6 round revolver for practice. I think I made a mistake selling that revolver, it was a very good shooter.

 

[Mxyzpltk]

Arch, thanks for your words, it seems like the 620 is going to be my choice, good luck in your matches.

I've been searching the web, and saw FIST holsters, what do you guys think about their work? I can't find any oficial word on their turnaround time but from customer leters seems like is fast, does anybody knows how fast?

I like #20, combined with a good gun belt it should be enough to carry a 620 or 686 for a while, don't you think?

Thanks again for all your comments.

 

[doc2rn]

I paid $600 for one of those 2 part barrels and it was always high and right even at 3 yards! Lesson learned traded it in on 10-4 now I'm as happy as a clam. I love the older guns like the 686 and my 36. They just dont make them like they used to.

 

[Mxyzpltk]

The good thing is that the gun store has a good stock of both 686 and 620, so if the 620 has any problem or if I just don't like it I can return it for a 686 or exchange it, they both cost the same here in my country (near $900, good part of that just import taxes, darn anti-gun clueless lawmakers), and I'm not totally parcial to the 620, I like them both.

 

[Sevengunner]

Bought a 620 Two Years Ago

I wrestled with the 686+ and 620 decision and after shooting both of them decided to get the 620. It is marginally lighter, but not enough so to have more noticable barrel flip. Frankly, most things I like about the 620--trigger pull, 7 rounds, etc. would have been the same with either gun. This is purely personal, but I prefer the looks of the 620.

I'll occasionally check the sights by shooting off a rest, and there's no question that the gun is more accurate than I am.

No problems have been observed putting a lot of ammo through. Most of the time I shoot .357 158 gr., but I've shot up plenty of .38+p and 125 gr. .357 The lock, which I have never touched, has not been a problem, although I guess we all think about it given the reports of occasional malfunction.

Don't know if the 2 piece barrel design is failure prone, but I have nothing but good things to say about my experience so far. One suggestion, though, and that is to keep the original rubber grips on the gun. Those grips cushion recoil very well and make shooting magnum loads pretty painless.